Listening to a silent revolution : Eight factors that can turn up the volume on transboundary aquifer cooperation and governance

Transcription

1 Kirstin I. Conti Listening to a silent revolution : Eight factors that can turn up the volume on transboundary aquifer cooperation and governance University of Amsterdam & International Groundwater Resources Assessment Centre, Delft, Netherlands Discussion Paper 1352 December 2013 This article presents historical factors that have enabled cooperation on the sustainable use of transboundary groundwater aquifers. The Global Water Forum publishes discussion papers to share the insights and knowledge contained within our online articles. The articles are contributed by experts in the field and provide: original academic research; unique, informed insights and arguments; evaluations of water policies and projects; as well as concise overviews and explanations of complex topics. We encourage our readers to engage in discussion with our contributing authors through the GWF website. Keywords: cooperation, sustainable, transboundary, groundwater, aquifer. In 2005, the invisible yet intensive extraction of groundwater resources was called a silent revolution that cannot be ignored. 1 In contrast, public attention is evermore being drawn to the abundance of groundwater resources and its potential to enhance water access. 2,3 The invisibility of groundwater makes its governance rife with uncertainty, 4 lacking trust and transparency, 5 and vulnerable to political sleights of hand 6 especially at the international level. Nevertheless, groundwater will play an increasingly critical role in ensuring a water-secure future. 7 Given that groundwater is approximately 99 percent of available freshwater, 8 ensuring cooperative management of these resources is critical.6 Unfortunately, groundwater is invisible but often forgotten in legal and governance regimes. 9,10 It is also taken for granted that very few states are cooperatively managing it. Researchers tend to site five key instances of cooperation over transboundary aquifers (TBAs): the formal agreements on the Genevese Aquifer, 11 the Guaraní Aquifer, 12 the Illumeden Aquifer System, 13 the North West Saharan Aquifer System, 14,15 and the Nubian Standstone Aquifer System. 16 Unfortunately, doing so implies that no other examples exist. However, with 445 known TBAs, 17 having only five examples of TBA cooperation seems highly improbable. So, where is TBA cooperation happening and what are the concrete factors that enable this cooperation? Answering this question required an intensive Suggested Citation: Conti, K.I. (2013), Listening to a silent revolution : Eight factors that can turn up the volume on transboundary aquifer cooperation and governance, GWF Discussion Paper 1352, Global Water Forum, Canberra, Australia. Available online at: to- a- silent- revolution- eight- factors- that- can- turn- up- the- volume- on- transboundary- aquifer- cooperation- and- governance/

2 investigation using peer-reviewed and grey literature as well as interviews of groundwater professionals from across the globe. Twenty cases of TBA cooperation were identified (see Figure 1).These cases were highly diverse in terms of the types and sizes of aquifers being governed as well as the socio-economic and geo-political conditions of the countries sharing the TBAs. This diversity allowed an analysis of factors enabling cooperation over TBAs. An enabling factor was defined as a circumstance, fact or influence that actively contributes to the occurrence of a cooperative event or cooperative interaction. 18 Enabling factors are distinguished from frequently espoused drivers of cooperation 19 in that they play a more concrete than theoretical role in cooperative processes (see Figure 2). The research revealed that there are eight enabling factors, which in varying combinations, facilitate TBA cooperation (see Figure 3 for a depiction of each TBA and the relevant factors). Existing Legal Mechanisms. Legal mechanisms influenced 12 cases, perhaps because of global and regional frameworks such as the International Law Commission s Draft Articles on the Law of Transboundary Aquifers 20 and United Nations Economic Commission for Europe Water Convention. 21 Legal mechanisms were particularly influential in Europe and North America. The analysis challenged the notion that formal negotiations and legal agreements are a prerequisite for cooperation. Rather, it showed that concepts of cooperation needed to extend beyond the legal realm in order to capture the nature of ongoing interactions. Existing Regional Institutions. Regional institutions were critically important in TBA cooperation and present in all but one case. Analysis of these institutions linked some cooperative outcomes to theoretical drivers of cooperation. Both theories of benefit sharing 22 and the coexistence of conflict and cooperation 23,24,25 were demonstrable in the case of several TBAs. Regional institutions were like containers within which states built trust and explored opportunities for collaboration, thereby creating the conditions needed to prevent water conflict in the longterm. 26 Funding Mechanisms. Funding mechanisms were highly influential having effected 14 cases, predominately in the Global South. Funding for cooperative activities came from the TBA countries themselves and/or donors like the Global Environment Facility. Funding was often linked to specific projects or capacity building activities but also yielded clear dividends. An example is the case of the Dinaric Karst Transboundary Aquifer System where the first comprehensive mapping of the system is underway. High Institutional Capacity. Institutional Capacity is a major challenge in the area of TBA governance. However, instances where capacity was very high proved to positively influence the level of cooperation. Convening technical working groups in joint management bodies or River Basin Organizations such as the Lake Chad 28 and Orange-Senqu River Basins 29 were factors in nine of the cases. Previous Water Cooperation. Previous water cooperation was present in 17 of the 20 cases. The fact that most states had previous interaction over their water resources supports theories that trust building over time can increase water cooperation. 30 Further, use of the Basins at Risk event scale 31 as an indicator showed that TBA cooperation events are a relatively good indicator of sustained positive interactions between states. However,

3 there were some red herrings wherein the cooperative event was not an indicator of sustained cooperation. Scientific Research. Scientific Research often catalyzed some interaction between states sharing a TBA. In the cases of the Guaraní and Abbotsford-Sumas Aquifers, cooperation between the academic and scientific communities preceded intergovernmental cooperation. 32,33 This shows that countries can be responsive to new data regarding TBAs by initiating cooperation after receiving it. Strong Political Will. Strong political will for TBA cooperation was more a matter of motivation than location. This factor was included when high level political officials made public statements indicating their intent to manage the TBA cooperatively. Political will was rare, only appearing in seven of the cases. However, it was present in most cases with high levels of cooperation. Third-party Involvement. The involvement of non-state actors also played an enabling role in cooperative processes. In some cases there was a link between thirdparties and funding mechanisms, wherein the funder played a role in facilitating the cooperation. But third parties specialized in water issues were also a factor. One such example was the Observatoire du Sahara et du Sahel, which helped facilitate TBA cooperation in both the Nubian Sandstone and Northwest Sahara Aquifers. These factors are a starting point. Further research on this topic is a matter of urgency. More cases of TBA cooperation need to be unearthed. We also need to foster these enabling factors in areas ripe for cooperation. Cooperation over TBAs is not a luxury but a necessity because half of the world s population relies on groundwater for their basic needs. 34 We cannot afford to misgovern these resources not now or in the future. We must turn up the volume on the silent revolution.

4 Figures

5 Figure 1. Locations of transboundary aquifer cooperation cases.

6 Figure 2. Role of enabling factors in transboundary cooperation cases. Source: Conti (2013b).

7 Figure 3. Summary of enabling factors present by transboundary aquifer. References 1. Llamas, M.R. and Martinez-Santos, P., (2005). Intensive Groundwater Use: A Silent Revolution that Cannot Be Ignored. Water Science and Technology, 15(8), McGrath, Matt (20 April 2012), Huge water resource exists under Africa, BBC, retrieved from 3. Karimi, Faith (12 September 2013), Vital underground water found in arid north Kenya, CNN, retrieved from 4. Feitelson, E., (2003). When and how would shared aquifers be managed. Water International, 28(2), Huntjens, P., Lebel, L., Pahl-Wostl, C., Camkin, J., Schulze, R. & Kranz, N. (2012) Institutional design propositions for the governance of adaptation to climate change in the water sector. Global Environmental Change, 22(1),

8 6. Feitelson, E. (2006). Impediments to the management of shared aquifers: A political economy perspective.hydrogeology Journal, 14(3), UN-Water and United Nations University, (2013) Water Security and the Global Water Agenda, UN- Water Analytical Brief. Retrieved from last accessed 15 November, Margat, J., & van der Gun, J. (2013). Groundwater Around the World. Lieden, Netherlands: CRC Press/Balkema. 9. Jarvis, T., Giordano, M., Puri, S., Matsumoto, K., & Wolf, A.T. (2005). International Borders, Ground Water Flow, and Hydroschizophrenia, Ground Water, 43(5), Eckstein, G. E. (2011). Managing buried treasure across frontiers: the international Law of Transboundary Aquifers.Water International, 36(5), Convention on the Protection, Utilization, Recharge and Monitoring of the Franco-Swiss Genevois Aquifer(Community of the Annemassienne region, the Community of the Genevois Rural Districts, and the Rural District of Viry, The Republic and Canton of Geneva) (18 December 2007, entered into force 1 January 2008), reprinted and translated to English at paper/2008franko-swiss-aquifer-english.pdf. Accessed 25 February Guarani Aquifer Agreement, (The Argentine Republic, the Federative Republic of Brazil, the Republic of Paraguay and the Oriental Republic of Uruguay) (2 August 2010, not yet entered into force) San Juan, Argentina [Official versions only in Spanish and Portuguese]. Retrieved from last accessed on 15 November Bamako Declaration Bamako Declaration of the Ministers in Charge of Water Resources of the Countries Sharing the Iullemeden Aquifer System (Governments of Republic of Mali, Republic of Niger, Federal Republic of Nigeria) (2009) Bamako, Mali. 14. Mécanisme de Concertation Permanent pour le Système Aquifère du Sahara Septentrional, (Governments of The People s Democratic Republic of Algeria, State of Libya, and Republic of Tunisia) (November 2005) Tunis, Tunisia. 15. Observatoire du Sahara et du Sahel (2008), The North-western Sahara Aquifer System Concerted Management of a Transboundary Water Basin, Synthesis Collection No.1. Retrieved from last accessed 15 November Programme for the Development of a Regional Strategy for the Utilization of the Nubian Sandstone Aquifer System Terms of Reference for the Monitoring and Exchange of Groundwater Information of the Nubian Sandstone Aquifer System, (Republic of Chad, Arab Republic of Egypt, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya (now Libya), Republic of Sudan) (2000). 17. International Groundwater Resources Assessment Centre (2012). Transboundary Aquifers of the World Retrieved from last accessed 15 November Conti, K.I. (2013a), Factors Enabling Transboundary Groundwater Cooperation: A Global Analysis, Presentation at Stockholm World Water Week, 4 September Gleick, P. H. (1993). Water and conflict: Fresh water resources and international security. International Security, 18(1) International Law Commission (ILC), Draft Articles on the Law of Transboundary Aquifers, (May 2008) UN Doc. A/CN.4/L Convention on the Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes, (17 March 1992, entered into force 6 October 1996) 1936 UNTS Sadoff, C. and Grey, D. (2002). Beyond the river: the benefits of cooperation on international resources. Water Policy, 4(5) Zeitoun, M., and Mirumachi, N.(2008), Transboundary water interaction I: Reconsidering conflict and cooperation.international Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economic, 8(4), Mirumachi, N. and Allan J.A., (12-15 November 2007) Proceedings from CAIWA International Conference on Adaptive and Integrated Management: Coping with Scarcity: Revisiting Transboundary Water Governance: Power, Conflict, Cooperation and the Political Economy. Basel Switzerland. 25. Craig, J.G. (1993). The nature of co-operation. New York: Black Rose Books. 26. Wolf, A. T., Yoffe, S. B., & Giordano, M. (2003). International waters: identifying basins at risk. Water

9 Policy, 43(5), Governments of Republic of Albania, Bosnia &Herzegovina, Republic of Croatia, and Montenegro, (2011). DIKTAS Project Inception Report. Retrieved from last accessed 15 November Adamu, Muhammed Sani, Groundwater as part of the Work of the Lake Chad River Basin Commission. Retrieved from nloads/pbgw_africaadamu.pdf? blob=publicationfile&v=2, last accessed December 12, Alker, M. (2010). The Stampriet Artesian Aquifer Basin, A Case Study for the Research Project Transboundary Aquifer Management in Africa. German Development Institute. Retrieved from 7FJFVT/$FILE/Studie%2032.pdf, last accessed 15 November Sálamé L. and van der Zaag, P. (2010). Enhanced knowledge and education systems for strengthening the capacity of transboundary water management. In A. Earle, A. Jägerskog, and J. Öjendal (eds.), Transboundary Water Management, Principles and Practices ( ), London: Earthscan. 31. Yoffe, S., Fiske, G., Giordano, M., Larson, K., Stahl, K. & Wolf, A.T. (2004). Geography of international water conflict and cooperation: Data sets and applications. Water Resources Research, 40 W05S04, Kemper, K. E., Mestre, E., & Amore, L. (2003). Management of the Guaraní Aquifer System Management of the Guaraní Aquifer System Moving Towards the Future. Water International, 28(2), Norman, E.S. and Melious, J.O. (2004). Transboundary Environmental Management: A Study of the Abbotsford-Sumas Aquifer in British Columbia and Western Washington, Journal of Borderlands Studies, 19(2) United Nations World Water Assessment Program, (2009) Water in a Changing World World Water Development Report (WWDR4). Paris/London: UNESCO/Earthscan. 37. Conti, K.I. (2013b). Cooperation over transboundary aquifers: Lessons learned from 10 years of experience, in J. Griffiths and R. Lambert (eds.) Free Flow: Reaching Water Security through CooperationF, UNESCO/Tudor Rose, Paris. About the author(s) Kirstin I. Conti is a PhD Research Fellow with the University of Amsterdam and the International Groundwater Resources Assessment Centre (IGRAC) in the Netherlands. Her doctoral research focuses on developing governance regimes for groundwater resources at different geographic levels. She is also engaged in project work with IGRAC, UNESCO and the Global Environment Facility. She received her Master of Laws in Water Governance and Conflict Management from University of Dundee and her Bachelor of Science in Earth Systems from Stanford University. About the Global Water Forum The Global Water Forum (GWF) is an initiative of the UNESCO Chair in Water Economics and Transboundary Governance at the Australian National University. The GWF presents knowledge and insights from leading water researchers and practitioners. The contributions generate accessible and evidence-based insights towards understanding and addressing local, regional, and global water challenges. The principal objectives of the site are to: support capacity building through knowledge sharing; provide a means for informed, unbiased discussion of potentially contentious issues; and, provide a means for discussion of important issues that receive less attention than they deserve. To reach these goals, the GWF seeks to: present fact and evidence-based insights; make the results of academic

10 research freely available to those outside of academia; investigate a broad range of issues within water management; and, provide a more in-depth analysis than is commonly found in public media. If you are interested in learning more about the GWF or wish to make a contribution, please visit the site at or contact the editors at editor@globalwaterforum.org. The views expressed in this article belong to the individual authors and do not represent the views of the Global Water Forum, the UNESCO Chair in Water Economics and Transboundary Water Governance, UNESCO, the Australian National University, or any of the institutions to which the authors are associated. Please see the Global Water Forum terms and conditions here. Copyright 2013 Global Water Forum. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivative Works 3.0 License. See to view a copy of the license.